Racist bloggers charged with sedition
-
you think retract statment means really regret meh?
dun think so leh.
all just a show.
but methinks the govt. needs to show that cannot discriminate lor.
i mean.. discrimination is inevitable lor.
dun apply only for race
even elistism also got -
Which is the worse form of discrimination - racial or elitist?
-
Sexual orientation.Originally posted by robertteh:Which is the worse form of discrimination - racial or elitist? -
when the three bloggers do eventually come out of prison / clear this mess up.... they're gonna be pissed-filled with revenge.
-
If one has she should flaunt it. Sexual attraction can be fatal.Originally posted by iveco:Sexual orientation. -
="mathew"]robertteh - I think you mentioned that blogs are private and accessible to the public - I think if the blogs were private and only read by the writer and his friends or only kept in his personal diary - he would not have been taken to town. The fact is his was a public documentation of his personal agenda - it is a public document and thus he became liable for his words !!!
Haven't we locked up a lot of people for the slightest fault. Aren't we becoming a society noted for criminalising the slightest as offence from chewing gums to letting of flats to illegal workers to presumed negligence in not building stainless steel window stayers of HDB windows.
Something cannot be public and private - maybe if he used a password and locked his comments - it might have been considered private. If someone had hacked into it then it is the hacker's problem.
In this case, I think he put it into public domain knowing that his comments are racially sad comments - with the express purpose of attracting more people to develop such thoughts - he was taken to town for that.
I think they should have been locked up for at least two years and banished to some far away island where they can vent their thoughts to the wind and the waves - but not to public!!!
Over-control of people has resulted in a society where citizens have been fearing left and right for all kinds of negligence or acts on presumptions of offences in many cases. So much so we need to start a yellow ribbon campaign but in the next breath we are condemning more and more people for slightest unintentioned immaturity and sending more people to collect yellow ribbons.
Whch problem is worse ? Over control of populations for the slightest window faults on imagined fear or immature posting of some 17 year old in some blogs? Are citizens aware of what the society is getting into with this kind of control.
It is not a simple case of racism and punishment. Racism is serious but the media or expression and intention need to be taken into account. If racism is published in national press or television, punishment should be severe but for something immature posted in private blog, we should be more moderate in meting out punishment.
Like the NKF case, those in authority may not be perfect or right. So do not make every action seem so perfect by extension of past arguments about threats. Situation today may be different. This should be considered too.
But what is certain irrespective of racism is that the Latest attempt to control blogs seem to be an extension of that past control-freak mentality which has already set us back as a society. Do consider this point please. -
Hello Mathew,(posted in CNA on 29.9.2005)
I did not advocate racism and have clarified my earlier posts many times. I agree that racism can be tricky. However we do have a lot of laws passed in the same manner - ministers hyping about dangers of this or that followed by civil servants overzealously charging people for smallest mistakes or indiscretions. Chewing gum laws is uncalled for and it has been the result of such hype. Defamation laws have been used against political participants for speeches made in the heat of election which should have been more objectively dealt with.
ISD has been used on people for non-treasonable and non-serious cases to serve the government control purposes.
Blogs and internets in time will become the target for more drastic actions against helpless citizens who are not very hard pressed by all kinds of control.
Think about all the policy assumptions about problems. Presentations on assumptiosn by the ministers about racism can be very dangerous in other ways as well due to likely over-zealous pursuits of assumptions is not yet understood by our leaders it seems.
That is why over-sold policy against welfarism has today caused us a very distressed high cost problem affecting 90% of the population.
My point is : do not just understand about the risk of racism but the likely hidden agenda to use racism to extend control to our other freedoms. Government has to learn that their past assumptions have produced many problems and should now be more objective in regulating the population. -
two words: orbi good.
-
i guess this serves as a wake-up call for people to act responsibly. Even though a blog may be a so-called personal diary, but how can it be a diary when u post it in the Internet for millions to see? And when u post things that is racist or flammtory in nature, it is dangerous, especially in Singapore, because ours is a multi racial society. We are not like the US where it is still a well known fact that their nation don't really attempt to integrate the blacks, the hispanics, the asians etc with the whites. We cannot afford to have a racial riot sparked here.
-
Racism is bad but controls already exist in so many regulations. There was no action taken for racism in work practices or happening in schools etc.Originally posted by nanren4ever:i guess this serves as a wake-up call for people to act responsibly. Even though a blog may be a so-called personal diary, but how can it be a diary when u post it in the Internet for millions to see? And when u post things that is racist or flammtory in nature, it is dangerous, especially in Singapore, because ours is a multi racial society. We are not like the US where it is still a well known fact that their nation don't really attempt to integrate the blacks, the hispanics, the asians etc with the whites. We cannot afford to have a racial riot sparked here.
Loss of freedom of information and intellectual and political vibrancy might be worse. Think whether this is what we want for our political system. This is a wake-up call to people to see the hidden agenda of further move against internet posting on the ground of racism.
Racial harmony has been used as reason to introduce GRC. Racial harmony can be controlled in other way but no control was attempted for racist practices of all kinds. So why GRC and why seeking out racism among the blogs. Because as has happened all too often, our governing system is one based on gerrymandering with all policies crafted for political perpetuation.
It uses racial harmony as excuse to start GRC without saying so many words but this GRC was actually calculated to make it more difficult (like increasing election deposit and rule on political donations) to create uncontested election walkover every election because group representations will further prevent oppositions to field candidates in election.
Think about this state of our political maturity. People must not be so easily taken in by schemes or look-good policies without enquiries or independent thoughts.
Now see what happen to our political freedom and participation? There are so many Walkovers created by our GRC and we are fast becoming a political desert in the east. -
To tell the truth, the East is one big freakin political desert.Originally posted by robertteh:Now see what happen to our political freedom and participation? There are so many Walkovers created by our GRC and we are fast becoming a political desert in the east. -
roberttehOriginally posted by robertteh:Haven't we locked up a lot of people for the slightest fault. Aren't we becoming a society noted for criminalising the slightest as offence from chewing gums to letting of flats to illegal workers to presumed negligence in not building stainless steel window stayers of HDB windows.
<>
wow, this is serious allegation! Why don't you give us some examples since there are abundance of cases?
Yes, i do agree that the govt does criminalise alot of offences but to be fair to it, imprisonment is not often used, mostly fine; that is why Singapore is such a fine country.
You seem so concerned about the governmental control that you've become exceedingly paranoid. This paranoia has caused you to loose your rationality and your reasoning to become confusing and sometimes conflicting. Here are some examples:
1) you said that the govt was using the racist postings and not porn blogs as a pretext to exert control in the cyberspace because porn didn't offer as good political leverage as racism. This argument is rather far-fetched as a govt bent on controlling will jump at any opportunities to do so. In fact, clamping down on porn will give the govt better public support.
2) you said that the govt singled out racism remarks to condemn. Doesn't that mean that the govt is serious in maintaining racial harmony?
3) you repeatedly insisted that the punishment for the 3 internet users was too severe. But the fact is they have yet to be convicted and you have yet to know their punishment.
4) you said that the trio should be punished lightly as blog traffic was low and so its impact was limited. But you at the same time said "the clamp down on blogs for personal views will be one more counter-productive move to curtail our further progress and opening up of our society." If blogs have limited impact then it's very difficult to also say that blogs can contribute to "further progress" and the "opening up of our society".
5) you said that the govt should have more impt things to do than to charge the racists. Are you suggesting that the govt should concentrate on impt things and let that there be lawlessness in the country?
It is a known fact that the govt is dictatorial but is it necessary to be so paranoid? -
Not to worry about my views as my views are just my views and should not hurt any one even if paranoid. So I will respect your detachment and objectivity in not calling me name like paranoid.Originally posted by lotus999:robertteh
<>
wow, this is serious allegation! Why don't you give us some examples since there are abundance of cases?
Yes, i do agree that the govt does criminalise alot of offences but to be fair to it, imprisonment is not often used, mostly fine; that is why Singapore is such a fine country.
You seem so concerned about the governmental control that you've become exceedingly paranoid. This paranoia has caused you to loose your rationality and your reasoning to become confusing and sometimes conflicting. Here are some examples:
1) you said that the govt was using the racist postings and not porn blogs as a pretext to exert control in the cyberspace because porn didn't offer as good political leverage as racism. This argument is rather far-fetched as a govt bent on controlling will jump at any opportunities to do so. In fact, clamping down on porn will give the govt better public support.
2) you said that the govt singled out racism remarks to condemn. Doesn't that mean that the govt is serious in maintaining racial harmony?
3) you repeatedly insisted that the punishment for the 3 internet users was too severe. But the fact is they have yet to be convicted and you have yet to know their punishment.
4) you said that the trio should be punished lightly as blog traffic was low and so its impact was limited. But you at the same time said "the clamp down on blogs for personal views will be one more counter-productive move to curtail our further progress and opening up of our society." If blogs have limited impact then it's very difficult to also say that blogs can contribute to "further progress" and the "opening up of our society".
5) you said that the govt should have more impt things to do than to charge the racists. Are you suggesting that the govt should concentrate on impt things and let that there be lawlessness in the country?
It is a known fact that the govt is dictatorial but is it necessary to be so paranoid?
I might have given views critical of actions against racism in blogs but I am not against actions against racism. So there is no basis of your allegation that I am contradicting my own views. What are you after and trying to prove - to defend actions against racisms or blogging. If your view is to defend actions against racism there is no need to do so except being paranoid as I am not against actions on racism.
I hope that more citizens will learn to give their views objectively and independently so that we together can contribute to more balanced policies not policies based on kiasuism of the past that stifled our political vibrancy and maturity. If you have read my posts you will no doubt see my point on this matter - to seek more balance and objectivity in governing of the country. -
Over the years, citizens so far have been repeatedly bombarded and brainwashed that welfarism is bad.
So many of them believe that welfarism is bad. Sadly while welfarism is bad behind the scene what is worse is happening - raising fees for essential government services (because people accepted all government views) to avoid so-called bad of welfarism. Today we are suffering from high costs because of privatisation of essential government services and all kinds of schemes aimed at raising fees to full market values.
HDB through creative accounting is double-charging people for land in selling HDB flats to people when lands are already paid for through taxes by people.
Motorists who already paid for 175% of import duty on cars are being made to pay for COEs and ERPs again when in the first place COE was presumably introduced to replace import car duty.
The tax and recovery system of charging government fees and a system of double and triple taxing happens because people are saying government is right in taking action on presumably racism in blogs without questions.
Many look-good policies have been auto-piloted as Ngiam Tong Dow put it to unintended negative consequences although original intention was supposed to be good.
There is an urgent need of balance and objectivity in governing the country, so that there will be a stop t oall the higher and higher costs and more and more charging of fees to full market values.
Therefore do not believe blindly the reason given for actions on the bloggers as there may be a hidden agenda for auto-piloting more controls and actions on blogging and internets.
Whose fault is it that today so many ministries and statutory boards are hoarding $1-2 billions per year although people are struggling to survive for three meals. They will deny such allegation like the NKF through proxies on net.
If we want to have better life it is time to correct excessive policies of the past as mentioned by giving views without fear or favor. What is stated as problem may not always be the true agenda. There might be hidden agendas as has happened in introduction of GRC.
Citizens must have their own views on past and present policies and not all the reasons stated are the real reasons.
If we readily believe in what is bad at the end we may invite what is worse. -
"when you post it in the internet for millions to see"? First, we have to determine if there is any dd for the viewership of *personal* blogs. If you do not advertise your blogs like Xiaxue or Mr Brown, who will actually bother to look for them, except some paronic govt officials perhaps? There are 3b ppl in the world who use blogs; what is the likelihood of your blog being read or even known of existence by others? Racism is no good, but arresting racist bloggers will not cure their racism.Originally posted by nanren4ever:i guess this serves as a wake-up call for people to act responsibly. Even though a blog may be a so-called personal diary, but how can it be a diary when u post it in the Internet for millions to see? And when u post things that is racist or flammtory in nature, it is dangerous, especially in Singapore, because ours is a multi racial society. We are not like the US where it is still a well known fact that their nation don't really attempt to integrate the blacks, the hispanics, the asians etc with the whites. We cannot afford to have a racial riot sparked here. -
Hello Anonymous, (posted to FU on 1.10.2005)
The ulterior motive of taking action against the racist bloggers was not to check on racism but to extend control of freedom of expression to the blogs and internet.
Once this action is explained there will be follow-up actions on posting of views in the net to control dissenting views.
So we can see that the new administration is just like the old one, practising unending kiasu controls and self-centred policies that only benefit the governing class and elites.
Under such a system, people will keep paying and supporting the government. Government will have to keep replacing migrating citizens with foreigners and local businesses with foreign ones to sustain the upper class.
We do not really have racism problem but immaturity of some youngsters due to failure of education policies.
Like the past, sentences or penalties will he drastic in order to exert control of the whole populations through fear.
Just go and look at all the past policies from anti-welfare to meritocracy, common people do not benefit. They are calculated to increase salaries and rewards of governing elites and increase costs government surpluses or reduce its responsibilities.
Other Asian governments are trying to motivate their people to make them entrepreneurs. Our system is aimed at taxing and cost recovery without any mass participation or broad-based solutions.
We will always have to bear with more and more costs increases to build surpluses and privatise government services to save costs. -
Sunday Times (2.10.2005) front-page headline: "DPM Wong Kan Seng: Actions on Racism in blogs or investigation into white elephants ...are non-negotiable..."
Obviously the DPM has not done his job with rationality.
Before tightening controls any further with possibly eventual clamp down on last bastion of freedoms of views in the net and declaring any control measures as non-negotiable, he should have taken a bit more effort in explaining why drastic actions are being taken on media like blogs and internet first and make his actions more accceptable to the citizens.
Is that too difficult to do? -
I agree that charges of sedition might be a bit... much, but one cannot deny that something had to be done. It is a fact that those comments were racist, and there would have been people who were seriously upset and offended by those unjustified comments. Speaking as one who has maintained a blog for several years and who has a tracker on said blog, I know just how easy it is for people to stumble onto the page, whether it be through links from another blog, search engines, or simply by clicking that 'next' button that is on the bar at the top of every blog, so there is a need to keep things civil.
Granted, the blogs in question might not have had all that much traffic, and so the impact was not as great as it would have been if it had been published in a newspaper. But that is not the point. If one wanted to make posts that are for one’s own eyes only, there is an option on blogger that allows private blogs and entries that do not show up to other people. If one wanted to make posts that are meant only for friends to see, then—as someone else has already pointed out—one can either put a password on it, or use a host that provides an option for friends-locked entries, like livejournal.com. By posting on a public blog that is accessible to anyone and everyone, the implication is that the blogger wishes the entry to be read by as many people as possible, and therefore he or she has to take the responsibility of ensuring that what is said will not break the law, regardless of the amount of traffic. Say there is a magazine that is amazingly unpopular, and that only one person out of 300 reads. Say that magazine decides to publish an article flaming the Chinese. I don’t think anyone here would tolerate it on the pretext that not many people actually read the magazine before that. The way I see it, it is the intent that is being questioned here, and not the impact.
I would like to say that 'this is my personal diary and thus I should be allowed to post whatever I want in it', but I do not, because I know that there is a clear and definite line between the words 'personal', and 'private'. The blog is written by me, it contains my views, it is personal. But it is by no means private. There have been several instances when my teachers and even my principal have poked about my online diary. I know this because they have told me so. Yet I do not worry, because I have never said anything that I would not dare say in public, or that I would not be able to justify and back up by evidence. I donÂ’t see it as my freedom to speech being stifled. To me, taking a bit of care when discussing possibly touchy subjects doesnÂ’t take much, and itÂ’s just common sense. It makes me sound like a goody-two-shoes prude, yes, but there it is.
Just my two cents worth. -
There is no disagreement that racism is undesirable and should be punished.
However it is another matter if government decides to use racism incident in blog as justification to extend control of views in blogs and internet. So far the minister for home affair has not given its rationale for wanting to extend control of views posted in blogs. This latest action on blogger appears to be a test case and if carried through will mean likelihood of more actions against bloggers and internet views. Would citizens be able to see this extension of control into blogs and net? -
roberttehOriginally posted by robertteh:Not to worry about my views as my views are just my views and should not hurt any one even if paranoid. So I will respect your detachment and objectivity in not calling me name like paranoid.
I might have given views critical of actions against racism in blogs but I am not against actions against racism. So there is no basis of your allegation that I am contradicting my own views. What are you after and trying to prove - to defend actions against racisms or blogging. If your view is to defend actions against racism there is no need to do so except being paranoid as I am not against actions on racism.
I hope that more citizens will learn to give their views objectively and independently so that we together can contribute to more balanced policies not policies based on kiasuism of the past that stifled our political vibrancy and maturity. If you have read my posts you will no doubt see my point on this matter - to seek more balance and objectivity in governing of the country.
paranoid is not "name"
i wasn't commenting on your views but just objectively telling you that your reasoning was inconsistent. i had listed out the examples, which you have yet to refute, so how could you say there was no basis for the allegations?
i appreciate your concern over the govt's gripping control and the insidious effects it has on us, but that doesn't mean that one can be reckless about facts. Moreover, how can one convince others if one's argument is not watertight?
robertteh, don't get too emotional. Aren't we here to exchange our views as well as to bring to light any discrepancies, ignorance, prejudice and hate? We could also take the opportunity to sharpen our debating skills, don't you think so?
cheers
lotus999 -
I think you did use the term paranoid to describe my views on the need for government to prove its case in extending control over our last bastion of freedom of expression in the media of blogs or the internet.Originally posted by lotus999:robertteh
paranoid is not "name"
i wasn't commenting on your views but just objectively telling you that your reasoning was inconsistent. i had listed out the examples, which you have yet to refute, so how could you say there was no basis for the allegations?
i appreciate your concern over the govt's gripping control and the insidious effects it has on us, but that doesn't mean that one can be reckless about facts. Moreover, how can one convince others if one's argument is not watertight?
robertteh, don't get too emotional. Aren't we here to exchange our views as well as to bring to light any discrepancies, ignorance, prejudice and hate? We could also take the opportunity to sharpen our debating skills, don't you think so?
cheers
lotus999
However since you have now clarified your meaning of paranoid, I would consider it settled. As regards inconsistency of my views on what is public or private views, in postings over the blogs, my view is that there may exist different opinions.
I think the government has yet to prove its case in extending control over our last bastion of freedom of expression in the media of blogs or the internet.
As regards whether postings in blogs are public or private views, my view is that there may exist different opinions.
The conventional view seems to be that words published in print or broadcase over air seems to be public. I feel that Blogs and internets are new forms of communications which cross international borders and exist to serve different purposes - they may exist for public as well as private purposes.
Some website like youngPAP did tolerate extremely foul remarks which shows that the authority itself has somewhat by its own action recognized that blogs and internets are not as public as the national newspapers.
This non-action for foul languages over the YoungPAP website only further supports my view that blogs and internets might be different from mass circulation newspapers or televisions. Moreover there may be complicated issues of double standard in our inability to extend same control over foreign blogging posting the same racist remarks.
Many websites like YoungPAP actually requires permission to register access before any one can post his or her views.
Is such a website public or private. I don't see that it is so public but there may be different view. It our government wants to extend control of views posted in such site or the private blogs, i think it is fair that the minister should give a better rationale before extending control over the blogs.
What is do difficult to prove the rationale in extending control over the blogs. After all if certain amibiquities exist whether blogs are public or private prompting the minister of amending the sedition act, then the minister has a public duty to prove his case before punishing bloggers. I am not saying that bloggers who posted racism remarks should not be punished.
I am saying that before punishing him, let him know the rationale why he needs to be punished not by extrapolation but by proper rationale.
The ball is in the court of the minister. -
I thought this only happened in China.
What on earth!! -
I just don't understand why these people were charged.
I think the govt is very childish on this issue. -
Did I say those things?Originally posted by robertteh:However since you have now clarified your meaning of paranoid, I would consider it settled. As regards inconsistency of my views on what is public or private views, in postings over the blogs, my view is that there may exist different opinions.
-
its not a good idea to allow hidden anger to boil till its we against them